for evidence from Watson scholar
Cedric Larson, McConnell replied,
“Watson was a brilliant innovator, and
he surely had the equipment around
(or could have rigged it) had he wished
to do so. The newspaper coverage
[of the affair and the divorce] was
scandalous, in all senses of the word. I
can’t imagine that an ordinary case of
infidelity would have caused quite that
much sensation. ... I suppose my feeling
is that Watson was so bright that he
should have made the recordings even
if he didn’t.”

Sex sells

It wasn’t until 2001 that the story was
seriously investigated. That’s when
Benjamin began his probe, eventually
working with three graduate students
to trace the story through introductory
and history textbooks, the Watsons’
divorce record and the correspondence
of Watson, Larson, McConnell and
others. The research team found that
the story stretched and changed, with
other versions alleging that Watson and
Rayner used a kymograph measuring
device during intercourse. McConnell
claimed that there was a photo of the
instruments Watson used for the sex
research. But Benjamin, who traveled
to both Hopkins and the Canadian
Psychological Association museum
where they supposedly hailed from,
found no evidence that the instruments
existed or had ties to Watson.

At least one textbook regarded thesex research story as gossip, the AP

authors found. In the third versionof his “History of Psychology” text,psychologist David Hothersall wrote:“A careful examination of Watson’sdismissal and divorce convinced a recentbiographer of Watson that there is noevidence that he was dismissed becauseof alleged experiments concerned withhuman sexual behavior.” Hothersallomitted the story entirely from his text’s

2004 fourth edition, as did most otherauthors by that time.

How did a rumor become textbookfodder? “Nothing really sells like sex,”posits Jodi Whitaker, of The Ohio StateUniversity, one of Benjamin’s co-authors.

“It was a wonderfully salacious story tospread around.”McConnell, who kept the Watsonstory in all eight versions of his textbook,between 1974 and 1994 (the last versionwas published after his death), likely fellprey to thinking about the past throughpresent-day attitudes, says Benjamin.

“Sexual affairs appeared more commonin [McConnell’s] time and they didn’tseem to have the consequence of theWatson affair,” he says.

It probably didn’t help that Watson— voted “handsomest professor” in 1919

at Johns Hopkins — had the movie-starlooks people wanted to associate withsexual experimentation, says Benjamin.

Watson’s outspoken interest in sex may
also have fueled the rumor. He had also
spoken about his professional curiosity
in sex at an address at Columbia
University in 1913, and wrote several
popular-press articles about human
sexuality when he worked in advertising.

One historian, John Burnham, whointerviewed Watson, his family and hiscolleagues, wrote, “each time that I triedto find out about his work in psychology… what I heard about instead was somewoman with whom he supposedly wentto bed.”And while historical evidenceindicates that Watson didn’t conductsex research and modern textbooks haveomitted the story, Benjamin finds thatcolleagues still write to him saying thatthey have seen the story mentioned orheard about it in a lecture.

“It’s hard to make myths die,”Benjamin says.

As for Watson, he devoted his
scientific training to advertising; he is
credited with coining innovations we
use even today, such as the term “coffee
break” for a Maxwell House campaign. In
spite of the gossip, his exit from academic
psychology marked an important shift in
the field, says Benjamin.

“Watson was at the height of his
fame, and behaviorism, the brand of
psychology that he promoted, was
beginning to dominate psychology,”
says Benjamin. “[Psychology] almost
certainly developed differently without
his dynamic presence.” n